Jeremy Parish wrote:The premise of this series is to focus on how these games communicate to the player the rules of play through game design rather than overt instruction. If the list seems predominantly Nintendo-heavy, that’s because Nintendo used to be really good at it. If it seems predominantly retro in focus, that’s because hardly anyone bothers to design games this way anymore, leaning instead on mundane tutorials rather than effective stage construction and carefully considered game flow.
Typical pseudo-intellectual rubbish. 8-bit games had two buttons and half a dozen simple moves, new games have 20 buttons and dozens upon dozens of moves and special systems, and you STILL had to read the manuals on old games on occasion to make sure you knew everything (not to speak of stuff like Civilization and Microprose's simulators, which required real STUDY of 200-page tomes for days to so much as BEGIN playing them properly -- modern tutorials are a BLESSING compared to what you had to do back then).
But no, here's a journalist weeaboo fagot who only played a couple of sidescrollers on the NES in his childhood, generalizing from that wretched little experience and botching the theory of the past, the present, and the future of the artform naturally enough.
HURR DURR, THERE WERE NO TUTORIALS IN PAC-MAN THAT I REMEMBER, SO WHY ARE THERE TUTORIALS IN 8TH GENERATION 50GIGAGBYTE GAMES WITH 20 BUTTONS!!! WAAAAAAAAA!
Fagot.
And then despite the help of tutorials he still sucks at the games so much that the developers have to dumb down everything and keep holding his hand throughout the entire game for him to not abandon it immediately. So he goes back and autistically analyzes 8-bit games screen-by-screen trying to convince everyone that it is somehow possible to make Watch Dogs work like Donkey Kong. And people pay him to write articles about videogames!
